In June 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled its prior decision in Williamson County and cleared the way for takings plaintiffs to assert claims relating to state takings in federal court. In Williamson County Regional Planning Commission v. Hamilton Bank of Johnson City, the Supreme Court held that property owners must seek just compensation under state law in state court before bringing a federal takings claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 in federal court. This ruling was extremely problematic for takings plaintiffs because the Supreme Court has also previously held that a state court’s resolution of a claim for just compensation under state law generally has preclusive effect in any subsequent federal suit. San Remo Hotel, L.P. v. City and County of San Francisco, 545 U.S. 323 (2005). Thus, the state action requirement articulated in Williamson County put a plaintiff in a very difficult Catch-22: “He cannot go to federal court without going to state first; but if he goes to state court and loses, his claim will be barred in federal court.”

Based upon this conflict, the plaintiff in Knick v. Township of Scott argued that Williamson County had been wrongly decided and that the state action requirement needed to be repealed. Fortunately for takings plaintiffs, the Supreme Court agreed, concluding that Williamson County was poorly reasoned and conflicted with much of the Court’s takings jurisprudence. As a result of the opinion in Knick v. Township of Scott, private landowners whose federal constitutional rights have been violated through a taking may now pursue relief in federal court without having to first attempt to litigate the issue in state court.